Comments on: We Review All Six Seasons of The Sopranos in a Relatively Short Posthttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/
Thu, 08 Dec 2016 17:05:17 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/By: Biblioklepthttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-508183
Mon, 29 Feb 2016 22:44:01 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-508183Thanks…so used to getting “You are a moron comments on this one”

]]>By: Jasonhttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-508173
Mon, 29 Feb 2016 21:26:08 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-508173This is probably the best and most even-handed explanation of the ending of the show I’ve seen so far. It fits both with the ‘evidence’ and dramatic arc on screen of what happened, but also the wider themes of the show, and explains how these are not mutually exclusive.

]]>By: philipem1000https://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-307386
Thu, 14 Aug 2014 16:05:24 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-307386Oh and I have to disagree a bit with:
7. The Sopranos is a commentary on and perhaps rejection of psychoanalysis as a mode of therapy, yet it uses the techniques of psychoanalysis to frame its stories.

No one does Psychoanalysis as a method that I can recall. The concepts are thoroughly embedded in some of the storyline and certainly in the character arc.

While Tony sure hates the role of mothers in Freudian analysis (but then who doesn’t?), and yes the story is VERY Freudian in its structure, but most schools of psychological thought dwell, with obvious reasons, on the family dynamic and its powerful tendency to be repeated in each generation. I don’t know that’s a rejection, seems to me the story shows he lives those concepts…

I add that Tony rejects psychotherapy per se as being useful or having any point (but then pretty much everything in his life fits that category). Indeed for him it is not ultimately useful; because of his conscious and unconscious choices to stay unchanged even as it enables him to learn and see who he is, what his choices are; he toys with our feelings as we see, again and again, he has new insight, he employs it in some positive way, and then he rejects it in some horrific way.

When Junior shoots him, we have a prolonged series of imagined and real events in which he sees the world anew, but it is at the end the same old Tony. Nihilism perhaps you are right. But it is Tony’s and his world’s nihilism that we tap into. I don’t think nihilism is the message we get for the rest of the world.

But for Tony, I think useful means it brings him money or sex or some other primal gratification, and anything that doesn’t is really not useful. In his case therapy is the opposite of useful, it forces him to question the sufficiency and appropriateness of his primal orientation, thus he rejects it out of hand.

Gotta say tho these writers did a stunning job of developing themes like this over the entire course of the show.

]]>By: philipem1000https://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-307378
Thu, 14 Aug 2014 15:25:23 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-307378One of the few redeeming moments in the show are those where Dr Malfi makes the clear decision that she will not go there, will not fall prey to Tony’s Soprano seductive power in order to get her revenge. She is the only moral pole in the show; just about the only character in the entire show who consistently is human, vulnerable, flawed, yet clear on what is right and what is wrong. She probably hopes that her therapy will allow Tony to change his life, at least some, to become a better person. And as I say in my own comments, one of the things psychology does in the series is allow Tony to see who he is, what he does with people he cares about, and why. And when Tony does see we hope he will make changes (he does at moments), and then consistently regresses and chooses not to move toward his better self.

]]>By: Feudal Yeomanhttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-307367
Thu, 14 Aug 2014 14:58:39 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-307367If the morons who wrote and produced that show put even a fraction of even one percent of what everyone here appears to be giving them credit for, then it would have been an awesome show.

]]>By: philipem1000https://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-307204
Thu, 14 Aug 2014 07:06:04 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-307204I’m a few episodes shy of doing the same thing, never saw more than a part of an episode before though I have seen the final scene…
I agree pretty much with what you have said but I interpret some things differently. A lot of things in the show can be seen as having multiple meanings. And the one thing that makes this a great show (I think Breaking Bad is much better tho) is that it really deals in symbols both implicitly and explicitly. The dream sequences alone are unprecedented. The use of psychotherapy is both an amazing tool to allow us to see parts of Tony we would never see and to reveal his ultimate bankrupcy. Tony has choices and the therapy shows us what they are, and he learns from his therapy things that he could use to change his life. He gains insight into himself, and he rejects the choices to make healthier changes in his life. And besides, who ever was psychotherapist to a mob boss? The story shorted that a bit I expected a lot of FBI visits to Dr Malfi and maybe a surreptitious break in…

Food is an immense part of the story, it is a metaphor for culture and sex and corruption and Tony’s frequent eating and overeating are no accident. They suggest a man of both enormous appetite and excesses, and a man who stuffs his rage inside as does Tony, of course. Until it pours out of him naturally. People are made into food verbally to put them down. They are consumed all but literally and maybe that too.

Tony is the protagonist and the show plays with our expectations. We expect even flawed protagonists to be people we root for and want to win. Walter White in BB is a perfect example. But try as we may we cannot ultimately do anything but dislike Tony. We expect somehow this is The Godfather Trilogy and Tony, like Michael, will in some way be redeemed, will show us something good and genuine. And the producers know we do, and they confound us to the end.

We come to know that every time we see a ‘better’ side of him we will be disappointed. Kindness shown to anyone is sure to end badly.

Indeed one lesson the story tells us, the way it is the anti-Godfather story, is that every person, good or bad, who gets involved with these people in any way ends up hurt.

But while Tony’s life may indeed be a big nothing, the story does not tell us that’s all there is. It is Tony’s decision, and many others’ to end life that way. “What’re you gonna do” is the fatalistic mantra of the Mafioso…But I bet Carmela is doing well with her investments and Tony’s hidden money…his family has not escaped his abuse but they are better people than he was….

]]>By: Feudal Yeomanhttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-302002
Fri, 01 Aug 2014 18:33:45 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-302002To be fair – other than Van Zandt basically ruining the show from the beginning – there did seem to be a cohesive plot centered around Tony and his Mom. Then she died – at which point the actress did a good job of annoying me as Janice, the heir apparent to replace the dead Mom.
So I suppose it is a decent show up until the point that the Mom dies and Janice exits for the FIRST time. I’m pretty sure that’s the point where the series just drifts completely off any plausible course, with Janice re-appearing for no apparent reason to try to make me hate her some more. But I couldn’t – because it was completely implausible that Tony would allow her to return.
Is there ANY chance that the case might be made that the Russian capped Tony? That MIGHT make me feel better for having wasted so much time sitting through Van Zandt’s excruciatingly horrible acting and all of the annoying helicopter plots.
Also, did the ducks ever come back? Were they carrying Janice? Thanks again for your review.

]]>By: Feudal Yeomanhttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-301995
Fri, 01 Aug 2014 17:50:46 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-301995I had a life when this “best TV show of all time” aired – but I’d heard the rave reviews, so I decided to check it out for free on Amazon Prime.
Well, I’d accidentally seen Lilyhammer – so I could never get past Van Zandt’s horrible impression of a mobster. It’s like he’s doing some Andrew Dice Clay bit over and over and over again. But apparently he never gets killed off – so who is he related to exactly? It’s like they pulled him out of some vaudeville mobster act. The boobs on the strippers in the show were MUCH more realistic than that ass clown’s impression of a mobster.
So I continued to watch it, hoping he’d die some horrible death – but nope, the good actors kept getting knocked off. Only there seemed to be no reason why? You say you hated Paulie – well, at least the guy playing Paulie could act. Anyway, Paulie just pops out of the inner circle into jail. See ya, Paulie? Good lord, PLEASE don’t give more lines to Silvio. Can’t he just go bang Janice and they get knocked off together? PLEASE? And WTF is even going on? At what point did the series even have ANY semblance of a plot?
Anyway, glad I didn’t waste any more of my life on that horrible “best POS of every other lame POS”. I guess I’m lucky I had a life in NYC, where oddly enough I was occasionally hanging out with mobsters, whenever this horrible show “transformed” TV, if that’s what it did? I didn’t drop back into TV Land until the last season of Breaking Bad. I guess, by that time, the transformation had completed – because I HATE television. Other than the Andy Griffith Show, it’s always just been horrifically bad. But Breaking Bad was just insanely good, which is how I got “tricked” into watching the Sopranos.
Then I broke from streaming it to watch Gravity (the movie) – and remembered why I usually despise anything and everything that causes “critics” to “rave”. They should have given Van Zandt Clooney’s part – at least I could have watched him DIE.
Anyway, thanks for your brief review. I just typed in “The Sopranos Suck” into Google and landed here – it was the first hit that covered the entire series rather than the ending I’ll never see that everyone apparently hated.
But you love TV – so glad you could get enough out of the POS to sum up why I should have never started watching it in the first place. And I have found that I’m depressed – but the show’s fault in that is only that it SUCKED. The Sopranos SUCK! It’s a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE show. NEVER WATCH IT! The Sopranos suck!
Hopefully that’ll get you higher on Google for other people who might have accidentally fallen for the Soprano’s BS “best TV show of all time” bit. It’s most definitely not – it’s just a horrible show. But if it paved the way for Breaking Bad – thanks to everyone who watched the POS. BUT – who does this Van Zandt moron know in Hollywood? Since you love TV, I’d love to know how it is he ever got a part on the show – and how you could possibly hate Paulie more than his lame excuse for a character? Seriously, WATCH him – EVERY time he has a line, he pauses – it’s like he’s doing a horrible impression of Andrew Dice Clay’s impression of a mobster. God it was just embarrassingly unbearable to watch – like fingernails scraping a chalkboard GOD PLEASE STOP IT bad.
And the show wasn’t much better. Also the chef was the only character with any heart – Chris was played by another bad actor who ruined any shot the character he played may have had of interesting me. But I thought Artie was exceptional – until he (for no reason) was suddenly in love with Chris’ fiancée, who got flipped by the FBI and then I quit watching because the Russian apparently wasn’t coming back to exact revenge.
Thanks again for your review. And I really am interested in how this Van Zandt guy got ANOTHER show – whoever he knows, or however he’s connected – every aspiring dbag in Hollywood should look the guy up and try to follow his “path” to “success”. Apparently it works VERY well.

]]>By: moradeshhttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-301432
Thu, 31 Jul 2014 03:49:18 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-301432It is a bad idea (and very depressing experience) to watch the show over the course of 2-3 weeks = 3-4 episodes/day. When I got the boxset I watched 1 episode/day and that was a good pace. I imagine it would become quite tedious and dreary, more like a chore, to sit through 3-4 episodes a day for close to a month. The only type of show that might work for is a sitcom, but even still. I also consider Sopranos > Six Feet Under > The Wire, which I consider to be 3 of the best TV series ever made. Can you recommend any others that are up to the same or similar standard?

Junior turning the blender on and forgetting the cover
Chris smacking Aide after she told him about Penn Gillette
Paulie jumping scared at the psychic when the guy started talking to spirits in his vicinity

]]>By: Biblioklepthttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-291329
Sun, 06 Jul 2014 21:35:22 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-291329Thanks for the thoughtful and analytic comment, Geoco. You’re right—Gandolfini’s performance anchors the show—although I do think the guy who plays Chris is also great, and some of the seasonal guest stars, like Joey Pantalone and Steve Buscemi, were excellent.

]]>By: Geocohttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-291117
Sun, 06 Jul 2014 00:10:09 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-291117This is a second attempt to post – I just about 15 minutes worth somehow. I loved your review and agree with most of your points. Pine Barrens was one of my faves, and it also baffled me why Chase left that Russian’s thread hanging. As for Pauley Walnuts, I think I’m in line with your second take on that character. Yes, he’s cold, and a simpleton sociopath with a gun and a sense of entitlement. But having grown up in a mob-influenced Irish-Italian neighborhood, I found this guy entirely believable. The Sopranos main appeal for me is it’s success in depicting the life and times in this subculture. I think I know what Tiffany (actually her husband) means about the show appearing to be a “cleaned up” version of what her husband witnessed, but your experience around wise guys will vary greatly, and will having to be “Cleaned up” considerably around some capos and especially the boss. Anyway, the real motive I have in writing is to give my opinion on the one – actually two characters I had real difficulty with. The first one is Big Pussy. I found this guy very tough to buy, and especially the second time around, I had difficulty watching him. The guy’s personality is thorazine-flat and he comes off as completely self-obsessed, self-serving and lifeless, to the extent that I wondered how the other characters, no slouches themselves in the selfishness arena, could have such affection for him. The other character is a minor one, but an even bigger disconnect, Carmela’s mother (can’t recall the name). Are we supposed to believe this woman is Italian? There’s NOTHING italian about this lady! (And I thought she was great as the Jewish mother-in-law in Goodfella’s)

A couple of other things, I missed how funny this show was the first time around. I think the writing and acting excels in this regard. Christopher’s intervention is one of the funniest scenes I’ve watched. Also just about any scene with Corrardo – especially when teamed with Bobby Bacala, sets a high standard of comedy!

Finally, in a show overflowing with great characters and performances, a few stand out. Obviously Gandolfini is brilliant, and the show would not work at such a high level without him. What seems a little odd to me now though is I don’t see any of the other regulars as necessarily exceptional. Good, believable characters for sure, but I think the writing, more than the acting made it tick. But I did think there were some great performances rolling in and out of the show. Janice is a train wreck that makes you cringe watching her. I can say the same about Richie Aprile. Both great performances.

One last thing that comes to mind – an exception to what I just said about the writing, is the dialogue among the Cousamanos’ and their social circles. These are intelligent and respectable members of the community that seem to have a adolescent fascination with OC and throw around F-bombs like penny candy on Halloween! What’s up with that? I thought it was uncharacteristically shoddy writing compared to the overall quality of the show.

]]>By: Peterhttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-226882
Tue, 01 Apr 2014 04:14:30 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-226882I loved this review. I never understood why, after watching the Sopranos, I would literally feel depressed. Not for a day, but for much longer. I didn’t make the connection that I had grown to love non-existent people that were completely unlovable. I cared about them when they are incapable of caring, in actuality, even for themselves. Ultimately, all of their behavior is self defeating and comes from a place of self hatred and fear.

It was Carmella’s conversation with Dr. Krackower that unlocked this for me. She understood clearly that staying involved with Tony was evil, and chose it anyway for comfort’s sake. Watching the Sopranos is ultimately a self depreciating experience for the viewer.

You know how you know that the Soprano’s is amazingly written? Because you watch this soul destroying trash over and over and enjoy it. You know how you know that it tapped deeply in the collective truth? James Gandolfini is dead.

]]>By: Biblioklepthttps://biblioklept.org/2011/07/21/we-review-all-six-seasons-of-the-sopranos-in-a-relatively-short-post/#comment-160843
Fri, 07 Feb 2014 19:36:14 +0000http://biblioklept.org/?p=9754#comment-160843I dunno. I liked it right away, but the episode “Unauthorized Cinammon,” which is late in the first season, really took it to the next level.